Cavalcade of Books

When I look at my TBR pile, which is really a scattering of books all across the sofa, the upholstered chairs, and stacks on the floor, my brain boggles at the variety of titles. It’s as though I have no focus. I was about to add a number (a large number) of mysteries to the list when a couple of friends came up with an idea, The Cavalcade of Books, which would be a list of three books by each of the ten writers on Ladies of Mystery. Yes, they would do my work for me—they’d bring together all the titles I want to read in the next few months, everything at my fingertips. Yay!

I’ve been writing a monthly post for Ladies of Mystery since June 2019, assuming I’ve managed to keep a complete list, which is a lot to assume about me sometimes. And during those months and years of writing my posts and reading posts by the other ladies I’ve learned about other parts of the country, this very strange writing business, lots of history, tricks and techniques I would never have thought of, marketing options, sales outlets, the thoughtfulness of my fellow blog writers, and had a lot of very good laughs. 

But you as a reader probably want something more than compliments and ravings from me to persuade you to try some of these books. Readers are so demanding, and that’s why we writers love you. You make us work, you give us a reason to dig deeper, think harder, write better. So herewith a little piece of why we read and (I) write mysteries. 

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Agatha Christie both wrote traditional mysteries. So did Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler. How can this be? They’re all so different. The form of the mystery has always seemed to me to be as broad as the range of human taste. You can write the story with any level of violence or no violence, and in the end you return to a point of stasis promised at the beginning. The form holds both writer and reader, and yet liberates both to explore and range widely (I almost write wildly, so drop that in there too).

https://bodiebluebooks.com/ladiesofmystery.

In The Cavalcade of Books you’ll find the whole range of crime fiction organized into seven categories. Just click on whichever one calls to you and find a list of novels by new and perhaps long favorite writers. You can also chase down a writer through the alphabetical index.

All these books come with special prices in effect from November 15 to December 31 (just in case you climbed onto a really slow Christmas/Holiday shopping train).

These women are amazing—hilarious, scary, captivating, fun, and terrific writers. Buy the books for your friends, your families, strangers you want to turn into friends. Then when the season becomes the crazy time of too much shopping, wrapping, eggnog, take one of your new treasures, crawl under the dining room table, and take a break. Visit the Northwest, the nineteenth century, India, or New York City. We all deserve a break. Even writers. Enjoy!

The Secret

Many of us in the writing community have a secret, and it’s not exactly the same secret. We write our books, talk about our characters, whom we love, and gnash our teeth over the plot holes, the ever-jiggling middle that refuses to settle down and dash forward, and the ending that leaves us dissatisfied, rewritten three or thirty-three times. You know this because you read us here. None of this is kept secret from anyone who reads a writer’s blog. And then we have to edit the soggy mess, find beta readers, edit it again, and then pop over to our editor, if we have one, or switch hats and become our own publisher.

Somewhere in this scenario is one step that every writer loves. We each have our own. Which one is mine? Those who know me can probably guess.

When I was in college I was the editor of the student humor magazine, which meant handling proofs and working with the printer. I loved working with the printer, seeing those strips of paper with types-set pages on them with little red pencil marks and handing them over to the printer. For some reason I prefer to forget, I always seemed to get him at dinner time. Yes, I love the publishing/printing process. And that brings me to the topic of today—Crime Spell Books.

CSB is the third publishing venture I’ve undertaken with friends or colleagues. What may seem daunting to others has an irresistible pull for me. Two other writers and I began Crime Spell Books after the new editors/owners of Level Best Books, another venture I began with another two friends, dropped the anthology for New England mysteries. They lived in the DC area, so it was understandable. But New England needed its own anthology, so Ang Pompano and Leslie Wheeler and I grabbed the opportunity, and published our first in 2021.

Devil’s Snare: Best New England Crime Stories 2024, now availables is our latest offering, with twenty-four stories, in every sub-genre. We post a call for stories in January, and we read every one that comes in over the next several months (to end of April). We rank the stories 1, 2, or 3 on our own lists, and then we share them to see what we have. It’s always gratifying to see how close we are on most of them. When we decide how many stories we want, we begin discussing the remaining stories that came close, and work for agreement.

Anthologies are among the best works we in the writing community can produce. They show a variety of writers and interests. They require strong collaboration. Each editor loves certain stories and not others, and here we rely on a deep respect for each other’s experience and taste so we can come to agreement. Not every story I love gets into the anthology, and the other two editors probably feel the same. But the result—a list of excellent mysteries and crime stories by known and unknown writers—is something we’re all proud of. And then we come to my special love/hate experience—formatting. I do this because I think there is something wonderful about holding in our hands a finished book that we made, with the chapters and lines of text laid out properly—no unruly paragraphs or rebellious headers or recalcitrant page numbers. Everything is in order and proper and beautiful.

So that’s my favorite part, as much as anyone might question that statement while I’m working on it. The end is worth the frustration, gnashing of teeth, moments of panic, and sheer terror that one wrong punch of a button will send the whole thing to oblivion. And then it’s done. The proof comes in the mail, and then the final copy. And I look up from my desk and there it is. Beautiful. Finished. I can rest of my masses of edited copy and have another cup of tea.

Reading Old Work

For the last few weeks I’ve been thinking about the old mss left unfinished. Some are in my computer. Some of them are on paper, stacked in a closet, shoved into the back where I can’t see them. That’s probably a good thing because if they were visible I’d pull them out and litter my desk with them.

There’s nothing wrong with any one of them, and several came very close to a sale. But there is something not quite right. Every writer knows what I’m talking about—the story we loved and worked on and with a gasp of hope sent off to an editor or an agent. And then it sat there, on someone’s computer or desk, gathering dust of being pushed lower and lower on the list of titles in the TBR file. The question becomes, what do we do with them? Do we reread and rework them? That’s a definite possibility. The more I learn, the more I rethink what I’ve done and recognize where I could have improved the story by changing the setting, developing the villain more, heightening the tension, or removing the extra secondary characters. But I don’t do these things in a novel. I might do some in a short story, but not in a longer work. And I think I know why.

Some years ago I was an avid fan of Margery Allingham’s Albert Campion mysteries. The first one appeared in 1929, The Crime at Black Dudley, and others followed fairly regularly into the 1960s. I don’t know if many people read her work anymore, but she was considered one of the great British mystery writers of her time. After reading through her entire list including a couple of novellas, I came across her first mystery, The White Cottage Mystery, published in 1928. This is only a year before her first Albert Campion story. And I was startled at the difference between the two., and the extent of her growth and development as a writer between her first and her second book. It’s an experience I have always remembered. 

We grow and change as writers. If our work sounds the same year after year, we’re not growing and it’s time to stop and ask why. I don’t want to write the same book year after year. There has to be something different, some sign of a new perspective, a new challenge. I can see this same ambition in some of the writers I read, but not in others. 

When I pulled out some of my old mss and had the passing thought of rewriting and updating them, I was frozen, and here I think I was so for a good reason. Whoever I was back then I am not her now. To bring one of those old mss up to the level I would want to write today would be to dismantle and basically erase it. Each line, each feeling and action would have to be different because I’m different. The story was good for its time and in some instances that’s twenty or more years ago. I was different and the world was different.

I’m in a long phase of decluttering the house I’ve lived in for over forty years, but I doubt I’ll toss out those mss, not just yet. Each one tells me something about writing, finding a voice, developing a voice through time, challenging ideas and creating new ones. I liked some of those stories more than others, and the failure of some weighed on me more than others, but like any other experience that comes to an end, I let those novels go and moved on.

The one important thing I remember is that even though they didn’t sell, they made me the writer I am today, with their lessons and discoveries, their pitfalls and graces. For that alone I will probably keep them for a while longer.

Punctuation

I’m a fan of punctuation. It’s not something I thought much about in my earlier years, except when a teacher told me I was using commas incorrectly. For my next paper I made sure to use commas as correctly as I could manage. Her response was, “It looks like you sprinkled them like salt.” This did not mar my love of all those black marks on the page also known as letters and punctuation marks, but I did grow skeptical of her instructional skills. 
 
When I arrived in graduate school and stared down at a passage composed in Sanskrit and printed in Devanagari (the script usually associated with that language) at the end of the first semester, I came to appreciate those little marks even more. Not all languages use them, and not even Western languages used them until the medieval period. Until then most paragraphs looked like this.
 
Wordswerewrittenallbunchedtogetherwithnoindicationofwheretoputastoporcommaorquestionmarkthatwouldmakesenseifweallreadwordsthesamewayitwouldntmatterwhatwasmissingbecausetherewouldbenodisagreementwheresomethingendsorbeginswouldbedeterminedtobethesamebyallreadersbutwouldthatbethecaseiftherewerenomarkertoshowwouldweknowhowotherreaderswereinterpretingaparticularpassagecouldbereadinanynumberofways
 
Now consider reading passages like this in a foreign language and a different script. Why am I thinking about all of this?
 
My partners and I have just finished editing and setting the new anthology from Crime Spell Books this year titled Devil’s Snare. One of them remarked that there were a lot of dashes and ellipses in this year’s crop of stories. We agreed that was so. But why?
 
In general most writers understand the correct use of the comma, colon, semicolon, period, quotation marks, question mark, and exclamation point. We know the basic purpose of the dash and the ellipses. I for one blame Emily Dickinson for the overuse of the dash. If she hadn’t been such an inspired poet, that particular mark might have faded into disuse. As it is, it’s at least as popular as the ellipsis. Why do I care?
 
I’m not sure that I do care about these marks. I use them but not nearly as often as many other writers I read. What I do care about is the reading experience. These two marks are so ubiquitous that I finally had to wonder why, and I think I have an answer. 
 
When I read I form a picture of the characters going about their actions in the setting given. I hear them speaking, usually in a manner that conforms to my image of them. If the writer is a good one, my imagination is stimulated and those characters are robust, filling my head. I hear the intonation that tells me Stella is annoyed, hinted by the way the author has described her posture and glance. When the little boy is frightened by the store owner on his first attempt at shoplifting, showing off to his friends, I can hear him stutter, pause, unsure whether he should go on or go quiet or get out as fast as he can. But sometimes my imaginings of the characters’ doings are interrupted by the text. The author wants me to hear an interruption, and ends a sentence with a dash, just so I’ll be sure to notice that the character is interrupted. And if the character should pause to reflect, the author uses an ellipsis to make sure I know the character is pausing, unsure what to say next. But why do this? Doesn’t the writer trust the reader’s imagination?
 
At this point I don’t think the writer is thinking about the reader. I think he or she is thinking about how this scene looks on a stage, in front of a camera. I think he or she has slipped into writing stage directions in the prose text for the actors. The writer is telling the actors how to interpret the scene, and the reader who has imagined something that seems rich and satisfying comes to a series of these doctored lines and the imagination is blunted. It comes to a halt. Clunk.
 
There is a valid use for both marks, but I see it less and less often. When I’m tempted to use one or the other, I take that as a hint from the writing unconscious that I may be getting lazy and it’s time to rework the sentence or the scene. I don’t want to do anything to hinder a reader’s imagination.
 
Perhaps I’m being irked by overuse, so in the interests of fairness I pulled out a copy of The Maltese Falcon by Dashiell Hammett. The Great Man uses dashes and ellipses, not with abandon, but with care and precision. Hammett was too good a writer to get lazy in the middle of a scene; he could rely on his characters getting across how they felt, what they were doing, and why. I doubt he was thinking about his books being turned into movies, or how a particular actor would interpret a particular scene. (Yes, I know, I could be wrong.)
 
I have finally reached the point where I want to eliminate every ellipsis I encounter, and slip back into my own imagining of the story and its characters. And this may well become my policy as an editor.

Reframing

Reframing is a well-established psychological tool for tackling problems that may seem intractable, and I found myself appreciating it recently.

For the last three years two other writers and I spend much of the spring and summer working on the annual anthology Best New England Crime Stories published by Crime Spell Books. All three of us read and select the stories, and all three of us edit. All the other duties are split. Ang Pompano sends out the acceptance or rejection emails and works on promotion, developing ads and the like. Leslie Wheeler manages the books, and works on sales opportunities. I get to write jacket copy, and lay out the book for POD. We have a great cover designer, and all three of us weigh in on the art and design. We review each other’s work, offer suggestions, and manage to put out a book we’re proud of every year while also having fun at our launch at Crime Bake in November.

Writing jacket copy is perhaps the least onerous job of a writer with a book going to press. My practice has been to look over the list of stories, arrange them in loose groups, and talk about the kinds of crimes they contain. I wrote the copy this month and sent it around to Ang and Leslie. Both liked it but Leslie had a response I hadn’t expected but found provocative. With all the talk of crime in the news today, depressing for everyone, perhaps we could focus on the characters who are fighting back, challenging the criminals or the system. This immediately appealed to me, and I ditched the first draft and reshuffled my note cards.

Looking at these stories from the perspective of the range of characters caught up in circumstance of crime and its consequences changed the way I viewed them and let me see beyond the cleverness of the plot, the range of characters swirling around incidents, the grounding bit of information, the unexpected twist. Most were ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances finding something within they didn’t realize they had. They were sometimes stymied by their situations, tripped up by bad luck or trapped by betrayal, but they were a match to the challenge, though not all succeeded in bringing about justice.

By reframing I also got closer to a different view of the crime. When a crime is committed it is most often by a person shriveled by life and seeking an unimaginative solution. An ordinary scam inspires a docile matron, and a drug addict discovers how far he has gone on the path to a. new life, and what his world is really like, something most readers will never experience. For others, following clues and solving a crime leads to a painful reckoning. Rewriting the jacket copy turned out, also, to be more challenging than cataloging a variety of crimes. As expected, the protagonists in these twenty-four stories were a varied lot.

With every year, we three editors choose stories that we think are well written, well thought out, and interesting as fiction. Because it’s crime fiction there is an understandable emphasis on the structure, the plot with a crime and its solution. But with a change in perspective, a reframing, I find myself appreciating the range of personalities grappling with life’s body blows. There is a richness not as easily appreciated otherwise. I hope our readers will feel the same way when the book is out in November.